Status
Not open for further replies.
Great stuff! Catching up on this still, but really enjoying it. Though one thing caught my eye:
With so many potential platforms, videogame manufacturers struggled to determine the best way forward. Should one concentrate on a single OS, or develop versions for several or all OS options? Tecmo, for example, went for the latter approach, developing versions for numerous platforms, such as its popular 1987 release based upon the novel/manga/anime series Vampire Hunter D.

Vampire Hunter D

rtXPogDHYzf362MCJDrqa4-480-80.jpg

8-bit Version is similar to this (actually from Bloodstained: Curse of the Moon; Image source “pcgamer.com”)

hqdefault.jpg

16/32 Version is similar to this (actually from Castlevania: The Lecarde Chronicles; Image source “youtube.com”)
both because I like Vampire Hunter D and because I suggested a game based on it in the long running Nintendo-Sony TL :p Fun coincidence.
 
As a sorta-fan of John Waters (I love and appreciate how unapologetically him he is) I'd love to just make that film work. Perhaps take a cue from the Ebert critique and replace Kathleen Turner (as much as I love her) with Francis McDormand and go Full Camp.
Frances not Francis, if you do an update with a HOA (Homicidal something something) slasher film.
 
As a sorta-fan of John Waters (I love and appreciate how unapologetically him he is) I'd love to just make that film work. Perhaps take a cue from the Ebert critique and replace Kathleen Turner (as much as I love her) with Francis McDormand and go Full Camp.
actually i thought kathleen turner did really well
 
actually i thought kathleen turner did really well
Honestly just going by Ebert's opinion here, who felt that her taking the mental illness seriously clashed with the campy tone. I've never actually seen that film. We could go the other way too, Turner's serious performance in a serious movie.
 
Honestly just going by Ebert's opinion here, who felt that her taking the mental illness seriously clashed with the campy tone. I've never actually seen that film. We could go the other way too, Turner's serious performance in a serious movie.
actually i never took it as campy. at first glance it looks campy, but it isn't. she plays a very appreciated person in the neighbourhood, seems very caring. and there is something that triggers her, and from point you more and more see he dark side.
The virtual camera position slowly moves from the front, how she looks like to others, then slowly towards her dark side. and also how the kifs & some around her exploit the serial mom thing is a nice critique on americas obsession sometimes with (serial) killers.
it s a dark comedy, but it is a very waters movie, means you really have to see it a few times to get all the nuances. and turner did a great job switching between the seemingly caring mom & neighbour and the psychopath at the flick of a switch.
and of course some of it was very over the top, but that is typically waters (and it is a dark comedy after all). and the ending especially where she breaks down the 3rd wall for a moment, and show the real psychoness.
and also remember it may be a dark comedy, but it is based on something that really happened .

and on your citing of ebert, here a quote from wiki on it:
Roger Ebert awarded it an average two stars (out of a possible four) finding some of Waters' satire effective but feeling that Kathleen Turner's decision to portray her character's mental illness with realism instead of in a campy fashion, while brave, made the character difficult to laugh at, writing, "Watch Serial Mom closely and you'll realize that something is miscalculated at a fundamental level. Turner's character is helpless and unwitting in a way that makes us feel almost sorry for her—and that undermines the humor. She isn't funny crazy, she's sick crazy."

turner is portraying a psychopath, that is pretty serious, and should treated that way. it is more that the viewer is made to think they are watching a dark comedy, but slowly but surely you discover this is no laughing matter, the movie pretty much deceives the viewer into this the same way psychopaths deceive people into believing they are normal. i think ebert just didn't get the movie. the movie underneath the veneer of comedy never was meant to be funny, and is actually pretty seriousm and this clashing of what it really is probably what made him feel that something is miscalculated. Waters really managed that fake sense of safety that helps psychos to lure their victims, right up to the end with the 'oh shit' moment. the first time you watch it, you watch as a comedy, the 2nd time that feeling is already far less, watching it the 3rd time you realise it is not comedy, it is the fascination of watching an ongoing trainwreck.

and since you haven't seen the movie, i seriously advise watching it.

edit: what eberts essentially says, he wanted the movie to look more like scary movie, and that he doesn't like it because it makes him use his brain
 
Last edited:
With all these 'smart slasher' movies is there any chance of some 'smart' Werewolf movies please?

Something that taps into the spiritual/shamanistic side of the Werewolf/Shapechanger genre perhaps please @Geekhis Khan?
 
With all these 'smart slasher' movies is there any chance of some 'smart' Werewolf movies please?

Something that taps into the spiritual/shamanistic side of the Werewolf/Shapechanger genre perhaps please @Geekhis Khan?
Ooh, how about a Rhinoceros-eque satire which uses lycanthropy as a metaphor for right wing indoctrination?
 
With all these 'smart slasher' movies is there any chance of some 'smart' Werewolf movies please?

Something that taps into the spiritual/shamanistic side of the Werewolf/Shapechanger genre perhaps please @Geekhis Khan?
A werewolf that isn't an a beast in wolf form (the 'human' mind still has some control, not complete, but some), but everyone still thinks it is a beast. So the main character most go all shamanistic vision quest to help him understand his transformation, "To master your beastly form, first you must master the beast within yourself", possibly with the shaman character winking at the camera while saying such utterly cliched dialogue. Or maybe just some better dialogue that actually looks at proper shamanistic themes, if you insist on being sensible about it. ;)
 
actually i never took it as campy. at first glance it looks campy, but it isn't. she plays a very appreciated person in the neighbourhood, seems very caring. and there is something that triggers her, and from point you more and more see he dark side.
The virtual camera position slowly moves from the front, how she looks like to others, then slowly towards her dark side. and also how the kifs & some around her exploit the serial mom thing is a nice critique on americas obsession sometimes with (serial) killers.
it s a dark comedy, but it is a very waters movie, means you really have to see it a few times to get all the nuances. and turner did a great job switching between the seemingly caring mom & neighbour and the psychopath at the flick of a switch.
and of course some of it was very over the top, but that is typically waters (and it is a dark comedy after all). and the ending especially where she breaks down the 3rd wall for a moment, and show the real psychoness.
and also remember it may be a dark comedy, but it is based on something that really happened .



turner is portraying a psychopath, that is pretty serious, and should treated that way. it is more that the viewer is made to think they are watching a dark comedy, but slowly but surely you discover this is no laughing matter, the movie pretty much deceives the viewer into this the same way psychopaths deceive people into believing they are normal. i think ebert just didn't get the movie. the movie underneath the veneer of comedy never was meant to be funny, and is actually pretty seriousm and this clashing of what it really is probably what made him feel that something is miscalculated. Waters really managed that fake sense of safety that helps psychos to lure their victims, right up to the end with the 'oh shit' moment. the first time you watch it, you watch as a comedy, the 2nd time that feeling is already far less, watching it the 3rd time you realise it is not comedy, it is the fascination of watching an ongoing trainwreck.

and since you haven't seen the movie, i seriously advise watching it.

edit: what eberts essentially says, he wanted the movie to look more like scary movie, and that he doesn't like it because it makes him use his brain
I'll definitely look for it, assuming I can ever get my TV away from the kid! I take it you vote "as OTL".

With all these 'smart slasher' movies is there any chance of some 'smart' Werewolf movies please?

Something that taps into the spiritual/shamanistic side of the Werewolf/Shapechanger genre perhaps please @Geekhis Khan?
Ooh, how about a Rhinoceros-eque satire which uses lycanthropy as a metaphor for right wing indoctrination?
A werewolf that isn't an a beast in wolf form (the 'human' mind still has some control, not complete, but some), but everyone still thinks it is a beast. So the main character most go all shamanistic vision quest to help him understand his transformation, "To master your beastly form, first you must master the beast within yourself", possibly with the shaman character winking at the camera while saying such utterly cliched dialogue. Or maybe just some better dialogue that actually looks at proper shamanistic themes, if you insist on being sensible about it. ;)
All of the above seem fun. I'll think about it.

*EDIT* the Shaman needs to be played by a famous Native American actor who is clearly playing the part of the "magical NA" stereotype to impress the stupid tourists. Maybe he's a bit of a fraud like Whoopie in Ghost.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top